Are you kidding, Matrox guys ?

[ckj]

What is this card ?
A G400 with few improvments ?

I want 3D (not GeForce3 power, ok..).
I have a marvel G400-TV and my games are slow and ugly.

I was waiting the new Matrox card but I now think that I will buy a Kyro II.

[JK]

OMG
Headcasting Tech? For business users low on bandwith? That's..that's a huge group of potential customers? Eh?

Now get real. Wake up, please. This is not worth the wait anymore. Or should we start speculating on Matrox' next release?

Sad.
JK

[ckj]

Ok businessmen would be very happy (they still have a good G450) but the others ?

[MetalCartman]

...and where the hell are the connectors for my RR-G???!!!????

[albatorsk]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by MetalCartman:
...and where the hell are the connectors for my RR-G???!!!????
</font>

[FLAME]
Oh, haven't you heard? They're dumping support for anything that isn't the latest and greatest. I, in my naivity, beleived matrox when they annouced the RainbowRunnerG as a RR for the whole G-series. Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but it only fitted on the G100, G200 and G400 right? Were there ever any connectors on the G450? I'm willing to bet that it won't fit on the G550 either (or any other "to be announced" card in the G-series).
[/FLAME]

Is it really that difficult to support your own products, Matrox?

/torsk

[MetalCartman]

@albatorsk:
I already heard that, but I don't mind the missing MJPEG support. I use my RR-G with the Winows Media Encoder capture analog video and convert it to .wmv-videos in realtime. But I spent a lot of money for my RR a few months ago, and the video-quality and the tv-receiver were worth it (btw the BT8x8-chip which is on most tv-cards sucks!).

@matrox:
I'm really disappointed (its more a kind of being upset!)! Not just because of the RR issue, also because of the crappy specs!

And if this is all that you have developed in the last two years, you will lose another customer! (->me)

[ckj]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by MetalCartman:
And if this is all that you have developed in the last two years, you will lose another customer! (->me)[/B]</font>

And me too !!!!!!!!!!

[bacon]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">OMG
Headcasting Tech? For business users low on bandwith? That's..that's a huge group of potential customers? Eh?</font>

I agree, business users on a 56K modem?? I don't think so. Excuse me but LANs, T1 connections, this technology is defunct even before it has been released.

[ckj]

Business users have usually a good internet connection.
Headcasting Tech is just a gadget and I can't understand how Matrox didn't see it. Why not having included better 3D performance while KiroII is giving huge performance for a good price ?
Why did matrox always release upgrades of their previous cards ?

Matrox will maybe win the business market but they will surely lose us, normal users (I don't speak about Hardcore gamers, matrox have lost them years ago).

[windigo]

LOL do the Jim Carey thing with your butt

------------------
MSI K7TPro2 Duron 750@900
512Ram G400DH32mb
Pioneer SCSI 16xDVD
msn messenger id: mkanashta

[CHHAS]

Hey, maybe they should rename it Buttcasting

[Darin]

LOL, when I first read the front news page describing Headcasting, I thought it was a joke, making fun of all the guesses as to what it was going to be. This is one of the most gimmiky things I've ever seen in serious computer hardware, and I think a true embarrassment to Matrox. Even IF there were a big market of business users out there with 56k modems, do you really see them taking all these pictures of their heads & sending them off to be processed, only so they could have a mocked version of video conferencing on their 56K modems? If you were talking to one of your clients, could you really, in a straight face, say "I want you to take pictures of the front & side of your head so we can do this cool talking head thing"?

Matrox should not be offering this card for $125, it should be five low payments of $24.99 each, but they might have to include a flowbee to get it to sell (you don't want bad hair cuts when you get your head modeled, do you?).

[FrankDC]

No I have a better term.. DEADCasting

Really this is disastrous for Matrox. If this is the best they can come up with after almost 2 years of development(??) the writing is on the wall..

[SteveC]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by bacon:
I agree, business users on a 56K modem?? I don't think so. Excuse me but LANs, T1 connections, this technology is defunct even before it has been released.</font>

Where I work, we have the UK part (HQ and main offices) of our company here in Southend, Essex, and one office up town in London and we run 16mbps token ring across the board. The link between Southend and London (40-50 miles) is nowhere near 16mbps, probably more like 4mbps. Now, also we have offices over in India, Malaysia and the States, and I know for a fact that the internet access speed in India is downright awful.

Technology such as this which works using very little bandwidth would be great in our situation - our network's stressed as it is, and having the ability to video conference to colleagues thousands of miles away with little impact on network traffic is a great idea.

Still, I might take photos of my fish or cat or something and chat to people through that!

------------------
Cheers,
Steve

"Life is what we make of it, yet most of us just fake"

[Greebe]

Hey Stevie, do the Gummy bears! LOL